Posted on 03/09/2010 12:13:22 PM PST by the invisib1e hand
Married or single priests from the early stages of Christianity practiced celibacy, according to a Vatican archaeologist.
During the first four centuries, married priests would renounce having intimate relationships with their wives, but they needed their the approval of their spouse.
careful don’t want any bruising of the Gentle Spirit
sure right -— and be sure to have the priest say lots of masses for the loved ones in limbo for FREE and see how that works out in the parish
The eternal punishment for sin (hell) is forgiven by God when a person confesses in sorrow and asks God’s mercy. God never refuses mercy to those who repent (which includes a firm will not to sin again, otherwise it’s not genuine sorrow for having sinned).
The temporal punishment to which indulgences apply is better understood as the effect or wound left behind in the soul of the repentant and forgiven sinner.
When a husband betrays his wife and is truly sorry and begs her to forgive him and she forgives him, genuinely, his is forgiven of the crime of betrayal of her.
But a wound remains in each of them, especially in the offending husband. He has proven himself untrustworthy and she cannot just act as if he never betrayed her
because he did betray her.
So he has to demonstrate his trustworthyness over and over and over by loving her, being trustworthy rather than doing new betrayals.
The analogy is not perfect because human-human and human-God relations are not identical. But in some sense, when we betray God by sinning, we wound ourselves, we make ourselves untrustworthy. God forgives us the punishment of hell by paying the price himself. But that wound is there and God knows it and the sinner knows it. And so he prays, and fasts, and refuses to sin again and eventually the wound is healed.
Indulgences remit whatever unhealedness might remain at death.
You can happily skip along saying that after God forgives you your sin everything is hunkey dory and it’s as if you never sinned at all and ain’t you just peachy
but it just plain ain’t true and you know it.
Catholic faith takes account of the reality of what happens when we sin. God’s grace and mercy are all powerful but God also knows how sin affects us and He’s not so stupid as to say, “hey, buddy, just skip down the garden path and pat yourself all over yourself and be peachy keen and burble along, I’m Okay and you’re okay.”
Because it’s not just okay. Yeah, I’ve escaped hell by God’s grace and Christ’s death on the cross, but I sinned against God and it ain’t all okay with me. I betrayed the God who died for me on the cross and it was a Big Deal and I messed myself up Big Time inside and I better do an awful lot of praying and giving and fasting and loving of God with ever fiber of my being just to show that I’ll never, ever betray Him again.
To simply say, “Hey God, thanks a bundle for dying on the Cross for me and forgiving my sins and ain’t we all happy and peachy and it warn’t no such Big Deal” might
1. incline me to succumb to temptation and sin again before long and
2. sounds a lot like I just take God for granted as a big Forgiveness Dispenser in the Sky.
You’ll complain that what I outlined here is “works righteousness.”
Well, go ahead. What you believe in is cheap grace.
Let’s see the tapes.
The title used the wrong word. “Continence” is what was meant. Celibacy dir not applied to married priests in the early Church. Continence did apply. Just plug in the word “continence” or “abstinence” and your problem is solved.
Sorry, I was responding really to Natural Law. But you used “chaste” incorrectly. Chaste does not mean abstinence or continence in all cases.
For unmarried people, chaste means abstinnce, no sex.
For married people, chaste means proper sexuality—not selfish, not abusive, full-self-giving—but yes, one can engage in marital relations chastely. Chaste does not mean abstinent if one is married.
For the married priests before celibacy became mandatory, chaste meant abstinence just like for unmarried people.
Chaste simply means “good, proper, ordered”—and what constitutes good and proper varies with one’s state in life.
Hard to do any convincing when you cannot cite ANYTHING in the New Testament that portrays a bishop’s duties as you have just laid them out.
If a man desireth the office of a bishop. Here, for the first time in the New Testament, is there a delineation of the qualifications and duties of bishops and deacons. Both offices have been alluded to in Acts (elders, Ac 11:30 14:23 15:02 16:04 20:17; deacons, Ac 6:1-6), and both are named in Php 1:1. To form a correct idea of the New Testament bishop we must get away from modern episcopacy. The New Testament bishop was not diocesan, but in charge of a single church. Each church had a plurality. Elders or presbyters, and bishops were only different designations for the same office. This arrangement was not changed until after the close of the first century and the death of the last of the apostles. Of these statements, admitted by the candid learned even of episcopal bodies, the following proofs may be submitted: (1) Paul summons the elders of the church at Ephesus (Ac 20:17), and calls them bishops ( overseers ) in Ac 20:28. (2) In the church of Philippi the bishops and deacons are named as the officers (Php 1:1). (3) Paul in this Epistle names bishops and deacons as the officers (1Ti 3:1,12), but names elders as officers entrusted with the same duties already named as those of the bishops in 1Ti 5:17-22. (4) In the Epistle to Titus, Paul commands to ordain elders in every city (Titus 1:5), but in turn describing the qualifications of an elder he calls him a bishop (Titus 1:7). (5) Peter addresses elders and commands them to exercise the office of bishops over the flock (1Pe 5:1,2). The Greek word episkope, as well as the word bishop, etymologically means to act as an overseer, or to take the oversight. (6) I might add that Clement of Rome, who wrote to Corinthians about the beginning of the second century, uses the terms interchangeably.
When did this fixation upon the sex or intimacy begin? One certainly cannot find Scriptural basis for such fixation.
I need a column number; give it to me and I’ll look the passage. I don’t really feel like reading all of Homily 33 to try to find whatever it is your source is referring to.
Don’t forget all those Borgias.
Celibate? I think not.
The fixation began when Protestants began insisting that Peter’s having been married was a big deal. You’re the one fixated on sex because you get your knickers in a knot when anyone claims that sex can be abstained from without being weird.
Ancient peoples knew that. Greek Philosophers abstained from marriage and sex for the love of wisdom. Every religion recognizes that sex is not the be-all and end-all, so they have various kinds of abstinence and selfcontrol.
The fixation began with Martin Luther who was obsessed with it. He declared that marriage was not as sacrament, was purely natural phenomenon, should not be abstained from, that abstinence was unnatural and a lot of people agreed with him.
They are the ones who were obsessed with sex. The rest of us have a nuanced, controlled, disciplined approach to it, even in marriage because marriage is NOT JUST ABOUT SEX. And life is NOT JUST ABOUT SEX. Pity that Martin Luther didn’t understand that.
Nope the problem is not solved. There is nothing in the New Testament that REQUIRES one to be unmarried or practising continence. To ascribe to scripture that which is NOT there borders on blasphemy
It was traditionally part of the priest's required fast before Mass.
Still the case in the Eastern churches -- that's why the Orthodox ordinarily celebrate the Divine Liturgy only on Sundays.
And, as pointed out above, that's a carryover from Jewish practice. Priests serving their "course" of service in the Jerusalem temple did not live with their wives.
Incidentally, there is no “book 11” of Gregory’s Homilies in the Gospels. Your source misread II (ii) for 11. Not a good sign.
My grace is not cheap, it had a huge cost.. My God, My King was crowned with thorns, beaten with a whip and then crucified to pay my penalty.. He bought me, He owns me ... I am forgiven by the Father, that promises He will see my sin no more... That my sin has removed as far from us as the east is from the west
The problem with your assumption is that you do not see that when God changes the heart, one hates sin, not because one will be punished for it, but because it offends a Holy God.. We repent and turn from sin,because we love Him and want always to honor Him...
To this day in the East (we have married priests), not only the priest, but any who are to commune of the Holy Mysteries must abstain from carnal relations from the hour of Vespers the night before the Liturgy.
There is an amusing story from Old Russia about a seminarian who when told this discipline by the learned archbishop who was teaching a course on priestly praxis, stammered, “But. . .Fr. Nicholai back home. . .he served Liturgy every morning. . .you mean he and his wife never. . .” The archbishop looked over his glasses and the young man and replied, “And for what purpose did the good Lord make the afternoon?”
I believe in the West, the corresponding discipline was stricter, and a priest was to abstain from carnal relations for the entire day before serving the Mass. Daily Mass then implied a celibate priesthood.
Here’s the text of Homily 33 in Evangeliarum. Now, exactly which phrase did your hack source have in mind?
LECTIO S. EVANG. SEC. LUC. VII, 36-50.
In illo tempore, rogabat Jesum quidam Pharisaeus [Col.1239A] ut manducaret cum illo. Et ingressus domum Pharisaei, discubuit. Et ecce mulier, quae erat in civitate peccatrix, ut cognovit quod Jesus [a 1Kb] accubuisset in domo Pharisaei, attulit alabastrum unguenti, et stans retro secus pedes ejus, lacrymis coepit rigare pedes ejus, et capillis capitis sui tergebat, et osculabatur pedes ejus, et unguento ungebat. Videns autem Pharisaeus qui vocaverat eum, ait intra se, dicens: Hic, si esset propheta, sciret utique quae et qualis est mulier quae tangit eum, quia peccatrix est. Et respondens Jesus, dixit ad illum; Simon, habeo tibi aliquid dicere. At ille ait: Magister, dic. [b 1Kb] Duo debitores erant cuidam feneratori: unus debebat denarios quingentos, et alius quinquaginta. Non habentibus illis unde redderent, donavit utrisque. Quis ergo [c 1Kb] eum plus diligit? Respondens Simon, dixit: [Col.1239B] [d 1Kb] Aestimo quia is cui plus donavit. At ille dixit ei: Recte judicasti. Et conversus ad mulierem, dixit Simoni: Vides hanc mulierem? Intravi in domum tuam, aquam pedibus meis non dedisti; haec autem lacrymis suis rigavit pedes meos, et capillis suis tersit. Osculum mihi non dedisti, haec autem ex quo intravit, non cessavit osculari pedes meos. Oleo caput meum non unxisti, haec autem unguento unxit pedes meos. Propter quod dico tibi: Remittuntur ei peccata multa, quoniam dilexit multum. Cui autem minus dimittitur, minus diligit. Dixit autem [e 1Kb] ad illam: Remittuntur tibi peccata tua. Et coeperunt qui simul accumbebant, dicere intra se: Quis est hic qui etiam peccata dimittit? Dixit autem ad mulierem: Fides tua te salvam fecit, vade in pace.
1592 1. Cogitanti mihi [f 1Kb] de Mariae poenitentia, [Col.1239C] flere magis libet quam aliquid dicere. Cujus enim vel saxeum pectus illae hujus peccatricis lacrymae ad exemplum poenitendi non emolliant? Consideravit namque quid fecit, et noluit moderari quid faceret. Super convivantes ingressa est, non jussa venit, inter epulas lacrymas obtulit. Discite quo dolore ardet, quae flere et inter epulas non erubescit. Hanc vero quam Lucas peccatricem mulierem, 1593 Joannes Mariam nominat, illam esse Mariam credimus de qua [g 1Kb] Marcus septem daemonia ejecta fuisse testatur. Et quid per septem daemonia, nisi universa vitia designantur? Quia enim septem diebus omne tempus comprehenditur, recte septenario numero universitas figuratur. Septem ergo daemonia Maria habuit, quae universis vitiis plena fuit. Sed ecce quia [Col.1239D] turpitudinis suae maculas aspexit, lavanda ad fontem misericordiae cucurrit, 1594 convivantes non erubuit. Nam quia semetipsam graviter erubescebat intus, nihil esse credidit quod verecundaretur foris. Quid ergo miramur, fratres, Mariam venientem, an [Col.1240A] Dominum suscipientem? Suscipientem dicam, an trahentem? dicam melius, trahentem et suscipientem, quia nimirum ipse eam per misericordiam traxit intus, qui per mansuetudinem suscepit foris. Sed jam textum sancti Evangelii percurrentes, ipsum quoque ordinem quo venerit sananda, videamus.
2. Attulit alabastrum unguenti, et stans retro secus pedes Jesu, lacrymis coepit rigare pedes ejus, et capillis capitis sui tergebat, et osculabatur pedes ejus, et unguento ungebat. Liquet, fratres, quod illicitis actibus prius mulier intenta unguentum sibi pro odore suae carnis adhibuit. Quod ergo sibi turpiter exhibuerat, hoc jam Deo laudabiliter offerebat. Oculis terrena concupierat, sed hos jam per poenitentiam conterens flebat. Capillos ad compositionem vultus exhibuerat, [Col.1240B] sed jam capillis lacrymas tergebat. Ore superba dixerat, sed pedes Domini osculans, hoc in Redemptoris sui vestigia figebat. Quot ergo in se habuit oblectamenta, tot de se invenit holocausta. [h 1Kb] Convertit ad virtutum numerum criminum, ut totum serviret Deo in poenitentia, quidquid ex se Deum contempserat in culpa.
3. Sed hoc Pharisaeus intuens despicit, et non solum venientem peccatricem mulierem, sed etiam suscipientem Dominum reprehendit, dicens intra se: Hic, si esset propheta, sciret utique quae et qualis est mulier quae tangit eum, quia peccatrix est. Ecce Pharisaeus veraciter apud se superbus, et fallaciter justus, aegram reprehendit de aegritudine, medicum de subventione, qui ipse quoque de elationis vulnere aegrotabat, [Col.1240C] et ignorabat. Inter duos autem aegros medicus aderat; sed unus aeger in febre integrum sensum [i 1Kb] tenebat, alter vero in febre carnis et sensum perdiderat mentis. Illa quippe flebat quod fecerat; Pharisaeus autem de falsa justitia elatus, vim suae invaletudinis exaggerabat. In aegritudine ergo et sensum perdiderat, qui hoc ipsum quoque, quod a salute longe esset, ignorabat. Sed inter haec nos gemitus cogit quosdam nostri ordinis viros intueri, qui, sacerdotali officio praediti, si quid fortasse juste exterius vel tenuiter egerint, protinus subjectos despiciunt, et peccatores quosque in plebe positos dedignantur, eisque compati culpam suam confitentibus nolunt, ac, velut Pharisaei more a peccatrice muliere tangi despiciunt. Quae profecto mulier si ad Pharisaei [Col.1240D] pedes venisset, nimirum calcibus repulsa discederet. Inquinari enim se alieno peccato crederet. Sed quia hunc vera justitia non replebat, de alieno vulnere aegrotabat. Unde semper necesse est ut cum peccatores quosque conspicimus, nosmetipsos [Col.1241A] prius in illorum calamitate defleamus, quia fortasse in similibus aut lapsi sumus, aut labi possumus, si lapsi non sumus. Et si censura magisterii debet semper virtute disciplinae vitia persequi, oportet tamen ut sollicite discernamus quia districtionem debemus vitiis, compassionem naturae. Si enim feriendus est 1595 peccator, nutriendus est proximus. Cum vero jam per poenitentiam percutit ipse quod fecit, jam noster proximus peccator non est, [a 1Kb] quia cum Dei se justitia contra se dirigit, et hoc in se punit, quod justitia divina reprehendit.
4. Sed jam iste superbus et arrogans qua sententia convincatur audiamus. De duobus quippe ei debitoribus paradigma opponitur, quorum unus minus, et alius amplius debet; utrorumque debito dimisso, [Col.1241B] quis amplius largitorem debiti diligat, interrogatur. Quibus verbis protinus ille respondit: Ille plus diligit cui plus dimittitur. Qua in re notandum est quia dum sua sententia Pharisaeus convincitur, quasi phreneticus funem portat ex quo ligetur. Enumerantur ei bona peccatricis, enumerantur mala falsi justi, cum dicitur: Intravi in domum tuam, aquam pedibus meis non dedisti; haec autem lacrymis rigavit pedes meos, et capillis suis tersit. Osculum mihi non dedisti; haec autem [b 1Kb] ex quo intravit, non cessavit osculari pedes meos. Oleo caput meum non unxisti; haec autem unguento unxit pedes meos. Post enumerationem vero subinfertur sententia: Propter quod dico tibi: Remittuntur ei peccata multa, quoniam dilexit multum. Quid, fratres mei, esse dilectionem credimus, nisi ignem? et quid culpam, nisi rubiginem? Unde nunc [Col.1241C] dicitur: Remittuntur ei peccata multa, quia dilexit multum. Ac si aperte diceretur: Incendit plene peccati rubiginem, [c 1Kb] quia ardet valide per amoris ignem. Tanto namque amplius peccati rubigo consumitur, quanto peccatoris cor magno charitatis igne concrematur. Ecce ea quae ad medicum venerat aegra sanata est, sed de salute ejus adhuc alii aegrotant. Nam simul discumbentes conquesti sunt, intra se dicentes: Quis est hic qui etiam peccata dimittit? Sed coelestis medicus aegros non despicit, quos etiam de medicamento fieri deteriores videt. Eam autem quam sanaverat per pietatis suae sententiam confirmat, dicens: Fides tua te salvam fecit, vade in pace. Fides etenim salvam fecit, quia hoc quod petiit posse se [Col.1241D] accipere non dubitavit. Sed ipsam quoque spei certitudinem jam ab illo acceperat, a quo per spem etiam salutem quaerebat. In pace autem ire praecipitur, ut a veritatis itinere in viam scandali ulterius non derivetur. Unde et per Zachariam dicitur: Ad dirigendos pedes nostros in viam pacis (Luc. I, 79). Tunc enim gressus nostros in viam pacis dirigimus, quando per illud actionum iter pergimus, in quo ab auctoris nostri gratia non discordamus.
[Col.1242A] 5. Haec, fratres charissimi, historica expositione transcurrimus; nunc vero, si placet, ea quae dicta sunt mystico intellectu disseramus. Quem namque Pharisaeus de falsa justitia praesumens nisi Judaicum populum, quem peccatrix mulier, sed ad vestigia Domini veniens et plorans, nisi conversam gentilitatem designat? Quae cum alabastro venit, unguentum fudit, retro secus pedes Domini stetit, lacrymis pedes rigavit, capillis tersit, eosdemque quos infundebat et tergebat, pedes osculari non desiit. Nos ergo, nos illa mulier expressit, si toto corde ad Dominum post peccata redeamus, si ejus [d 1Kb] poenitentiae luctus imitemur. Quid namque unguento, 1596 [e 1Kb] nisi bonae odor opinionis exprimitur? Unde et Paulus dicit: Christi bonus odor sumus Deo in omni loco (II Cor. II, [Col.1242B] 15). Si igitur recta opera agimus, quibus opinionis bonae odore Ecclesiam respergamus, quid in Domini corpore nisi unguentum fundimus? Sed secus pedes Jesu mulier stetit. Contra pedes enim Domini stetimus cum, in peccatis positi, ejus itineribus retinebamur. Sed si ad veram poenitentiam post peccata convertimur, jam retro secus pedes stamus, quia ejus vestigia sequimur quem impugnabamus. Lacrymis mulier pedes ejus rigat. Quod nos quoque veraciter agimus, si quibuslibet ultimis membris Domini per compassionis affectum inclinamur, si sanctis ejus in tribulatione compatimur, si eorum tristitiam nostram putamus. Capillis mulier pedes quos rigaverat tersit. Capilli quippe superfluunt corpori. Et quid abundans terrena substantia, nisi capillorum speciem tenet? Quae dum ad usum necessitatis superfluit, [Col.1242C] etiam abscissa [f 1Kb] non sentit. Capillis ergo pedes Domini tergimus, quando sanctis ejus, quibus ex charitate compatimur, etiam ex his quae nobis superfluunt, miseremur, quatenus sic mens per compassionem doleat, ut etiam larga manus affectum doloris ostendat. Rigat namque lacrymis Redemptoris pedes, sed capillis suis non tergit, qui utcunque proximorum dolori compatitur, sed tamen eis ex his quae sibi superfluunt non miseretur. Plorat et non tergit, qui verba quidem doloris tribuit, sed non ministrando quae desunt vim doloris minime abscidit. Osculatur mulier pedes quos tergit. Quod nos quoque plene agimus, si studiose diligimus quos ex largitate continemus, ne gravis nobis sit necessitas [Col.1242D] proximi, ne ipsa nobis ejus indigentia quae sustentatur fiat onerosa, et cum manus necessaria tribuit, animus a dilectione torpescat
6. Potest quoque per pedes ipsum mysterium incarnationis ejus intelligi, quo divinitas terram tetigit, quia carnem sumpsit. Verbum enim caro factum est, et habitavit in nobis (Joan. I, 14). Osculamur ergo Redemptoris pedes, cum mysterium incarnationis ejus ex toto corde diligimus. Unguento pedes [Col.1243A] ungimus, cum ipsam humanitatis ejus potentiam sacri eloquii bona opinione praedicamus. Sed hoc Pharisaeus videt et invidet, quia cum Judaicus populus gentilitatem Deum praedicare conspicit, sua apud se malitia tabescit. Sed Redemptor noster facta ejusdem mulieris quasi bona gentilitatis enumerat, ut in quo malo Judaicus populus jaceat agnoscat. Nam sic Pharisaeus retunditur, ut per eum, sicut, diximus, perfidus ille populus ostendatur. Intravi in domum tuam, aquam pedibus meis non dedisti, haec autem lacrymis rigavit pedes meos. Aqua quippe extra nos est, lacrymarum humor intra nos, quia videlicet infidelis ille populus nec ea quae extra se erant unquam pro Domino tribuit; conversa autem gentilitas pro eo non solum rerum substantiam, sed etiam sanguinem [Col.1243B] fudit. Osculum mihi non dedisti; haec autem ex quo intravit, non cessavit osculari pedes meos. Osculum quippe dilectionis est signum. Et infidelis ille populus Deo osculum non dedit, quia ex charitate eum amare noluit, cui ex timore servivit. Vocata autem gentilitas Redemptoris sui vestigia osculari non cessat, 1597 quia in ejus amore continuo suspirat. Unde et sponsae voce de eodem Redemptore suo in Canticis canticorum dicitur: Osculetur me [a 1Kb] osculo oris sui (Cant. I, 7). Osculum recte conditoris sui desiderat, quae se ei obsequi per amorem parat. Oleo caput meum non unxisti. Si pedes Domini mysterium incarnationis ejus accipimus, congrue per caput illius ipsa divinitas designatur. Unde et per Paulum dicitur: Caput Christi, Deus (I Cor. XI, 3). In Deo quippe, et non in se quasi in homine, credere [Col.1243C] Judaicus populus fatebatur. Sed Pharisaeo dicitur, Oleo caput meum non unxisti, quia ipsam quoque divinitatis ejus potentiam, in qua se Judaicus populus credere spopondit, digna laude praedicare neglexit. Haec autem unguento unxit pedes meos, quia dum incarnationis ejus mysterium gentilitas credidit, summa laude etiam ejus ima praedicavit. Sed jam Redemptor noster enumerata bona concludit, cum per sententiam subdit: Propter quod dico tibi: Remittuntur ei peccata multa, quoniam dilexit multum. Ac si aperte dicat: Et si durum est valde quod coquitur, abundat tamen amoris ignis quo etiam dura consumantur.
7. Libet inter haec considerationem tantae pietatis intueri. Peccatricis mulieris opera, sed poenitentis, qua aestimatione Veritas apud se servat, quae ejus adversario [Col.1243D] sub tanta distributione enumerat. Ad Pharisaei prandium Dominus discumbebat, sed apud poenitentem mulierem mentis epulis delectabatur. Apud Pharisaeum Veritas pascebatur foris, apud peccatricem mulierem, sed tamen conversam, pascebatur intus. Unde et ei sancta Ecclesia, quem sub specie hinnuli cervorum quaerit, in Canticis canticorum dicit: Indica mihi quem diligit anima mea, ubi pascas, ubi cubes in meridie (Cant. I, 6). Cervorum quippe hinnulus Dominus appellatur, juxta assumptam carnem antiquorum filius patrum. Ferventior vero in [Col.1244A] meridie aestus ardescit, et umbrosum locum hinnulus quaerit, quem aestus igne non afficit. In illis ergo cordibus Dominus requiescit, quae amor praesentis saeculi non incendit, quae carnis desideria non exurunt, quae incensa suis anxietatibus in hujus mundi concupiscentiis non arescunt. Unde et Mariae dicitur: Spiritus sanctus superveniet in te, et virtus Altissimi obumbrabit tibi (Luc. I, 35). Umbrosa ergo loca in meridie ad pascendum hinnulus quaerit, quia talibus mentibus Dominus pascitur, quae per respectum gratiae temperatae corporalibus desideriis non uruntur. Plus ergo poenitens mulier pascebat intus quam Pharisaeus Dominum pascebat foris, quia ab aestu carnalium quasi hinnulus Redemptor noster ad illius mentem fugerat, quam post vitiorum ignem poenitentiae [Col.1244B] umbra temperabat.
8. Pensemus quantae pietatis peccatricem mulierem non solum ad se admittere, sed ei etiam ad tangendum pedes praebere. Consideremus gratiam misericordis Dei, et damnemus multitudinem reatus nostri. Ecce peccatores videt et sustinet, resistentes tolerat, et tamen quotidie per Evangelium clementer vocat. Confessionem nostram ex puro corde desiderat, et cuncta quae delinquimus relaxavit. Temperavit nobis districtionem legis misericordia Redemptoris. In illa quippe scriptum est: Si quis hoc vel illud fecerit, morte moriatur. 1598 Si quis haec vel illa fecerit, lapidibus obruatur (Exod. XIX, 12; Lev. XX, seq.). Apparuit conditor et Redemptor noster in carne, confessioni peccatorum non poenam, sed vitam [Col.1244C] promittit; mulierem sua vulnera confitentem suscipit, et sanam dimittit. Inflexit ergo ad misericordiam duritiam legis, quia quos juste illa damnat, ipse misericorditer liberat. Unde bene quoque in lege scriptum est quia manus Moysi erant graves; sumentes ergo lapidem, posuerunt subter, in quo sedit; Aaron autem et Hur sustentabant manus ejus (Exod. XVII, 12). Moyses quippe sedit in lapide, cum lex requievit in Ecclesia. Sed haec eadem lex manus graves habuit, quia peccantes quosque non misericorditer pertulit, sed severa districtione percussit. Aaron vero mons fortitudinis, Hur autem ignis interpretatur. Quem itaque mons iste fortitudinis signat, nisi Redemptorem nostrum, de quo per prophetam dicitur: Erit in novissimis diebus praeparatus mons domus Domini in [Col.1244D] vertice montium (Isai. II, 2)? Aut quis per ignem, nisi Spiritus sanctus figuratur, de quo idem Redemptor dicit: Ignem veni mittere in terram (Luc. XII, 49)? Aaron ergo et Hur graves manus Moysi sustinent, atque sustentando leviores reddunt, quia Mediator Dei et hominum cum igne sancti Spiritus veniens mandata legis gravia, quae dum carnaliter tenerentur portari non poterant, tolerabilia nobis per spiritalem intelligentiam ostendit. Quasi enim manus Moysi leves reddidit, quia pondus mandatorum legis [c 1Kb] ad virtutem confessionis retorsit. Hanc nobis [d 1Kb] sequentibus misericordiae promissionem innuit, cum [Col.1245A] per prophetam dicit: Nolo mortem peccatoris, sed ut convertatur et vival (Ezech. XXXIII, 11). Hinc iterum sub Judaeae specie unicuique peccatrici animae dicitur: Si dereliquerit vir uxorem suam, et illa recedens duxerit virum alterum, nunquid revertetur ad eam ultra? nunquid non polluta et contaminata erit mulier illa? Tu autem fornicata es cum amatoribus multis, verumtamen revertere ad me, dicit Dominus (Jerem. III, 1). Ecce paradigma turpis mulieris dedit. Ostendit quod post turpitudinem recipi non possit. Sed hoc ipsum paradigma quod protulit per misericordiam vincit, cum dicit fornicantem mulierem 1599 recipi nequaquam posse, et tamen ipse fornicantem animam ut recipiat exspectat. Pensate, fratres, pondus tantae pietatis. Dicit quod fieri non potest, et [Col.1245B] demonstrat quia hoc ipse facere etiam contra morem potest. Ecce vocat, et quos inquinatos denuntiat, hos etiam amplecti quaerit, a quibus desertum esse se queritur. Nemo ergo tantae misericordiae tempus perdat, nemo oblata remedia divinae pietatis abjiciat. Ecce superna benignitas aversos nos revocat, et nobis revertentibus suae clementiae [a 1Kb] sinum parat. Unusquisque ergo penset quo debito constringitur, [b 1Kb] quando illum Deus exspectat, nec contemptus exasperatur. Qui ergo permanere noluit redeat, qui stare contempsit saltem post lapsum surgat. Quanto nos amore conditor noster exspectat insinuat cum per prophetam dicit: Attendi, et auscultavi, nemo quod bonum est loquitur; non est qui recogitet in corde suo et dicat, Quid feci? (Jerem. VIII, 6.) Certe nunquam [Col.1245C] cogitare mala debuimus. Sed quia cogitare recta noluimus, ecce adhuc sustinet, ut recogitemus. Videte tantae [c 1Kb] pietatis sinum, considerate apertum vobis misericordiae gremium; quos male cogitantes perdidit, bene recogitantes quaerit. Ad vos ergo, fratres charissimi, ad vos oculos mentis reducite, et poenitentem peccatricem mulierem in exemplum vobis imitationis anteferte; quaeque vos in adolescentia, quaeque in juventute deliquisse meministis, deflete; morum operumque maculas lacrymis tergite. Amemus jam Redemptoris nostri vestigia, quae peccando contempsimus. Ecce, ut diximus, ad recipiendos nos supernae pietatis sinus aperitur, nec maculosa in nobis vita contemnitur. Per hoc quod inquinationem nostram perhorrescimus, internae jam [Col.1245D] munditiae concordamus. Revertentes nos Dominus clementer amplectitur, quia peccatorum vita ei esse indigna jam non potest, quae fletibus lavatur in Christo Jesu Domino nostro, qui vivit et regnat cum Patre [Col.1246A] Deus in unitate Spiritus sancti, per omnia saecula saeculorum. Amen
Let that be a lesson to you. You can get banned on this forum a lot faster than on the others, too.
opps she huh? Sorry.. .we agree BTW
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.